University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. 1994-1995, no. 36.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. 1995-1996, no. 37.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. 1996-1997, no. 38.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. 1998-1999, no. 40.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Spring 2000, no. 41.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Spring 2001, no. 42.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Spring 2002, no. 43.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Fall 2007, no. 46.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Fall 2009, no. 47.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Fall 2010, no. 48.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Fall 2011, no. 49.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science newsletter. Fall 2012, no. 50.

Newsletter from the University of Iowa School of Library and Information Science.

Organisaation innovatiivisuutta edistävät ja estävät tekijät. Case Technology Business Research Center

Tämän työn toimeksiantajaorganisaatio oli Lappeenrannan teknillisen yliopiston alainen, kauppatieteitä, teknologiaa ja tuotantotaloutta työssään yhdistävä tutkimusyksikkö, Technology Business Research Center, TBRC. Erään innovatiivisuustutkimusprojektin (InnoSpring) yhteydessä haluttiin selvittää myös oman tutkimusyksikön innovatiivisuuteen vaikuttavia, edistäviä ja estäviä tekijöitä. Tutkielman tavoitteena oli kartoittaa niitä seikkoja, jotka organisaation - tässä tapauksessa yliopiston tutkimusyksikön - henkilökunnan, projektityöntekijöiden, projektipäälliköiden sekä johdon mukaan vaikuttavat yksikön kykyyn luoda ja omaksua uutta, sen innovatiivisuuteen. Työ toteutettiin focus group-ryhmähaastattelumenetelmällä (kvalitatiivinen tutkimus), joihin osallistuivat omina ryhminään työntekijätaso, projektipäälliköt sekä johto.Haastattelut äänitettiin, litteroitiin ja koodattiin Atlas-Ti-ohjelmistolla. Loppuraportti verkostokuvineen luovutettiin tutkimuslaitokselle heinäkuussa 2005. Ryhmäkeskustelun teemoista ja kysymysten muodosta johtuen tulokset käsittelivät niin tutkimusyksikön nykyistä tilaa kuin eräänlaista "toivetilaa", millainen olisi ihanteellinen ja innovatiivinen työpaikka. Merkillepantavaa oli, että työssä tuli systemaattisesti esiin enemmän innovatiivisuutta edistäviä kuin ehkäiseviä seikkoja - vaikka osa edistävistä seikoista koskikin nimenomaan "toivetilaa". Keskustelluimpia teemoja olivat johtajuus,tavoitteellisuus ja strategian, yhteisen suunnan tarve. Samoin olemassa olevienprosessien kehittäminen, osaamisen (niin oman kuin koko organisaationkin) kokoaminen ja kehittäminen edelleen sekä tulosten jalkauttaminen.

The value of future opportunities: comparison of information technology firms and forest companies

There are several alternatives for valuing the future opportunities of firms. The traditional appraisal methods for single projects such as net present value, internalrate of return and payback rules have been criticized in recent years. It has been said that they do not take into account all growth opportunities of firms. At the company level, business valuation is traditionally based on financial and market information. Yield estimates, net worth values and market values of shares are commonly used. Naturally, all valuation methods have their own strengths and shortcomings. In the background of most estimation rules there is the idea that the future of the firms is quite clear and predictable. However, in recent times the business environment of most companies has changed to a more unpredictable direction and the effects of uncertainty have increased. There has been a growing interest in estimating the risks and values of future possibilities. The aim of the current paper is to describe the difference between the value of futureopportunities in information technology firms and forest companies, and also toanalyse the backgrounds for the observed gap.

MANAGING STRATEGIC CHANGE:New Business Models Applying Wireless Technology as a Source of Competitive Edge

The diffusion of mobile telephony began in 1971 in Finland, when the first car phones, called ARP1 were taken to use. Technologies changed from ARP to NMT and later to GSM. The main application of the technology, however, was voice transfer. The birth of the Internet created an open public data network and easy access to other types of computer-based services over networks. Telephones had been used as modems, but the development of the cellular technologies enabled automatic access from mobile phones to Internet. Also other wireless technologies, for instance Wireless LANs, were also introduced. Telephony had developed from analog to digital in fixed networks and allowed easy integration of fixed and mobile networks. This development opened a completely new functionality to computers and mobile phones. It also initiated the merger of the information technology (IT) and telecommunication (TC) industries. Despite the arising opportunity for firms' new competition the applications based on the new functionality were rare. Furthermore, technology development combined with innovation can be disruptive to industries. This research focuses on the new technology's impact on competition in the ICT industry through understanding the strategic needs and alternative futures of the industry's customers. The change speed inthe ICT industry is high and therefore it was valuable to integrate the DynamicCapability view of the firm in this research. Dynamic capabilities are an application of the Resource-Based View (RBV) of the firm. As is stated in the literature, strategic positioning complements RBV. This theoretical framework leads theresearch to focus on three areas: customer strategic innovation and business model development, external future analysis, and process development combining these two. The theoretical contribution of the research is in the development of methodology integrating theories of the RBV, dynamic capabilities and strategic positioning. The research approach has been constructive due to the actual managerial problems initiating the study. The requirement for iterative and innovative progress in the research supported the chosen research approach. The study applies known methods in product development, for instance, innovation process in theGroup Decision Support Systems (GDSS) laboratory and Quality Function Deployment (QFD), and combines them with known strategy analysis tools like industry analysis and scenario method. As the main result, the thesis presents the strategic innovation process, where new business concepts are used to describe the alternative resource configurations and scenarios as alternative competitive environments, which can be a new way for firms to achieve competitive advantage in high-velocity markets. In addition to the strategic innovation process as a result, thestudy has also resulted in approximately 250 new innovations for the participating firms, reduced technology uncertainty and helped strategic infrastructural decisions in the firms, and produced a knowledge-bank including data from 43 ICT and 19 paper industry firms between the years 1999 - 2004. The methods presentedin this research are also applicable to other industries.